At a press conference this morning on Staten Island, a host of local officials, including Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, gathered to highlight the needs of the hard-hit borough in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. And, although many pols spoke, no one was more impassioned than Borough President James Molinaro, who called the Red Cross an “absolute disgrace” and even urged the public to cease giving them contributions.

“Because the devastation in Staten Island, the lack of a response,” Mr. Molinaro said to explain his comment to NBC after the press conference. “You know, I went to a shelter Monday night after the storm. People were coming in with no socks, with no shoes. They were in desperate need. Their housing was destroyed. They were crying. Where was the Red Cross? Isn’t that their function? They collect millions of dollars. Whenever there’s a drive in Staten Island, we give openly and honestly. Where are they? Where are they? I was at the South Shore yesterday, people were buried in their homes. There the dogs are trying to find bodies. The people there, the neighbors who had no electricity, were making soup. Making soup. It’s very emotional because the lack of a response. The lack of a response. They’re supposed to be here….They should be on the front lines fighting, and helping the people.”

Update: (9:40 a.m. 11/2/12): Mr. Molinaro said after his outburst, the Red Cross arrived with the needed soup.

Several other local officials agreed with Mr. Molinaro’s rage over Staten Island’s situation, although they did not call out the Red Cross specifically.

“It is as the borough president, Jim Molinaro, said, it’s disgusting, it really is,” State Senator Andy Lanza said, criticizing the city for giving the go-ahead to the New York City Marathon this weekend and the focus on pumping the water out of the East River tunnels. “We’re talking about getting water of the tunnel. Let’s get the water out of the tunnel tomorrow, let’s get the people out of the water today. There’ve been thousands of people who have been displaced. There are people who are cold, who are hungry, who are without a place to go, and looking for warmth. There are people still trapped. Yet we’re talking about marathons and tunnels. I walked on the rooftop of a house yesterday, I stepped on it because the debris that surrounded it was level with the rooftop. That’s what happened here on Staten Island.”

Congressman Michael Grimm concurred.

“I think this is an example of what infuriates people here on Staten Island,” he said. “Like Senator Lanza just said, we have people, people still in water. Families displaced, families wondering where their grandparents are. Are they at a shelter? Are they at a hospital? Or are they gone? That’s what we should be focusing on. I think it would be very misguided to have this marathon. I think that the people of Staten Island will see this, unfortunately…as another shot against them, that the City Hall is more worried about getting everything running again for Manhattan and making everything look like it’s back to normal. We’re not back to normal and we’re not going to be back to normal for a long time.”

The Red Cross used to be a Christian organization, with compassion, sympathy, and Christian Love, not any more! They should change their name to Rainbow Hat. (Hat is for begging, and Rainbow because it has all colours, I don't mean the skin colour but unbiblical understanding of human affairs.

This is a shame to me. I am a lifeguard at a gym, and we are sponsored by Red Cross. We meet all their standards, proudly I might add, and so they let us use their name and certification. I've been trained and retrained by them for many hours, and appreciate their hard work towards preserving and holding life as a high and valuable treasure.

But, let's not forget why they are called the Red Cross in the first place. The Cross. If an organization loses their anchor, needless to say, they float adrift. That's the absolutely amazing thing about progressivism, how it is ubiquitous and can infiltrate literally anything. Red Cross isn't the only once pious organization gone adrift as well (Boy Scouts of America for example)

Andywel wrote:The Red Cross used to be a Christian organization, with compassion, sympathy, and Christian Love, not any more! They should change their name to Rainbow Hat. (Hat is for begging, and Rainbow because it has all colours, I don't mean the skin colour but unbiblical understanding of human affairs.

Just because the founder happened to be a Christian doesn't mean the organization was a Christian one. No more than the Red Cross is probably a homosexual organization because its founder was likely a homosexual (see your own link). Think J. C. Penny is a Christian department store chain because James Cash Penny was a Christian? How about the Ford Motor Company. Think it's a Christian automobile manufacturing company because Henry Ford was a Christian?

The Red Cross was never a Christian or any other kind of religious organization.

My own comment about the Red Cross concerns its operation. My father was a firefighter in a large metropolitan city, and in the cold of winter when fighting a long standing blaze the Red Cross would come out to the scene and provide coffee for the firefighters. This was a "contract" they had with the city. However, the Red Cross would charge the firefighters for the cup of coffee and whatever food they offered. Of course they paid up because their was no alternative; however, if a fire broke out during the night when they were sleeping few of them took their billfolds or loose change with them. These they typically left behind in the station in their lockers. The upshot was that not every firefighter was able to get a cup of hot coffee. Finally, the city took action and asked the Salvation Army if they would be willing to do the same, but without charge. And they said "absolutely." They not only gave away free coffee but free donuts and rolls as well. This chincy charitable philosophy of the Red Cross has always stuck in my mind

Last edited by Audacity on Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Interesting. It took me a while to learn that all charities aren't equal. Use to feel bad not giving when they'd ask, and the I realised things like the people asking are normally part of a business who asks for donations on behalf of this or that charity, take a big cut, and then passes on a fraction back to the charity itself.

Then there's charities setup for tax evasion purposes. Charities can support this and that immoral practice I'd most definitely not want to be supported, and on and on. Now there are some really good ones out there, but a lot are really wolves in disguise and people should research them before handing over their hard earned cash.

"Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 10:13)

Audie wrote:Not so long ago in Hong Kong, our Filipina maid had to return to her family.
What she earned, she kept none for herself, sending all back to support her family.

When she left I put in her hand an envelope with ten thousand dollars USA, the equivalent of two years' salary.

The expression on her face is forever in my memory. Astonishment and gratitude, yes,
but there were other things there too.

I still visit that look and wonder at what exactly it was that happened that day.

Thoreau wrote..

"If you give money, spend yourself with it, and do not merely abandon it to them."

What did I do wrong, in what way could I have spent myself that I did not?
I always treated her with respect, or so I thought.

When I give money to beggars, I always give them a smile and a kind word, I dont just drop coins with a sneer.

What was Thoreau saying that I do not understand?

Thoreau was heavily influenced by Eastern/Hindu spiritual thought. He wrote of Bhagvat-Geeta and was more inclined to be a pantheist. He appears to been enamored with the goddess Ganga of Hinduism which involves invoking good fortune and removing consequences of negative karma caused by violating Hindu moral/ethical codes.

Actually the goddess Ganga is no more that the ancient Astatre also known as Ishtar who also descended into the netherworld as well as taught beauty, goddess of love, natural order, marketing, commerce, lust, seduction to sorcery, promoting war to kill off humankind deemed as inferiors (such as enemies and unborn babies in the womb). In Hindu mind she is more of the kinder side but the wading in buckets of blood is there as well too.

Thoreau, being influence by these sorts of things should cause one's eye brows to be raised as well as helps grasp his role in the advancement of progressive liberal thought that lead to communism later on. Yes, both utopia views have killed more people than all wars of religion combined and toss in the aborted babies is indeed very Innana- Astrete-Ishtar-ish wading in buckets of blood and seducing people to ideas that sound good but produce famine, lack, war, breeds hate, feeds off of bitterness and envy...

Bottom line Thoreau is dead and gone. While it sounds good and all very Mother Teresa-ish one must ask, after all the money is gone, what of the poor then? When progressives run out of other peoples money, what then?

Thoreau is bankrupt...

People easily flock to Thoreau and Hinduism these days but come to Jesus - NO not at all.

Why?

That is the real question - Thoreau cannot save you and neither can Hinduism.

A Pastor friend in India reports often how members of his church are murdered by peace loving Hindus on a regular basis. Yes, buckets of blood...
-
-
-

I actually do have an issue with Red Cross. If you give blood once, they never, ever leave you alone asking for further donations. I have had to block two numbers from Red Cross just because they were so relentless with their begging.

I think they copyright their logo. The pool I work at has to be within regulation guidelines of the American Red Cross, or else we can't wear red uniforms, or have the Switzerland flag on our tubes and shirts. We pay a little to them to use their name, because it gives our pool prestige."Red Cross certified" carries a lot of reassurance behind it. And helps reassure our guests that we aren't a bunch of spaced-out teenagers sitting in the chair staring at the water

Audie wrote:
Where do you suppose they get the money to keep on you to give more?

I can't believe I forgot this, but donation money as well. Red Cross is both national and international, with Red Cross of America being the most well funded due to Americans having the most disposable income to give to charities. I doubt over the pond they chase people to get them to donate blood, so if I ever wanted to escape before they bleed me dry, I could leave the country lol.

There's really never a shortage of blood, from what I've heard. They can store blood at banks for up to a month, but after that, it is disposed of. Bleh. I don't faint at the sight of blood, but drum barrels full of blood would nauseate me.

Audie wrote:
Where do you suppose they get the money to keep on you to give more?

I can't believe I forgot this, but donation money as well. Red Cross is both national and international, with Red Cross of America being the most well funded due to Americans having the most disposable income to give to charities. I doubt over the pond they chase people to get them to donate blood, so if I ever wanted to escape before they bleed me dry, I could leave the country lol.

There's really never a shortage of blood, from what I've heard. They can store blood at banks for up to a month, but after that, it is disposed of. Bleh. I don't faint at the sight of blood, but drum barrels full of blood would nauseate me.

I don't know where I'm going with this

Hmm, my husband and I are devoted blood-givers - actually, he gives plasma about every 3 weeks. How do you know there's never a shortage? In Australia, at least, they advertise quite a bit for new donors - I don't think they'd do that if they were over-supplied. They'd probably be much more interested in financial donations

Audie wrote:
Where do you suppose they get the money to keep on you to give more?

I can't believe I forgot this, but donation money as well. Red Cross is both national and international, with Red Cross of America being the most well funded due to Americans having the most disposable income to give to charities. I doubt over the pond they chase people to get them to donate blood, so if I ever wanted to escape before they bleed me dry, I could leave the country lol.

There's really never a shortage of blood, from what I've heard. They can store blood at banks for up to a month, but after that, it is disposed of. Bleh. I don't faint at the sight of blood, but drum barrels full of blood would nauseate me.

I don't know where I'm going with this

Hmm, my husband and I are devoted blood-givers - actually, he gives plasma about every 3 weeks. How do you know there's never a shortage? In Australia, at least, they advertise quite a bit for new donors - I don't think they'd do that if they were over-supplied. They'd probably be much more interested in financial donations

Better to have blood and not need it, than to need blood and not have it. I think that is Red Cross' philosophy toward blood. Which makes sense, because conflict is unpredictable, and natural disasters only slightly more predictable.

Audie wrote:
Where do you suppose they get the money to keep on you to give more?

I can't believe I forgot this, but donation money as well. Red Cross is both national and international, with Red Cross of America being the most well funded due to Americans having the most disposable income to give to charities. I doubt over the pond they chase people to get them to donate blood, so if I ever wanted to escape before they bleed me dry, I could leave the country lol.

There's really never a shortage of blood, from what I've heard. They can store blood at banks for up to a month, but after that, it is disposed of. Bleh. I don't faint at the sight of blood, but drum barrels full of blood would nauseate me.

I don't know where I'm going with this

Hmm, my husband and I are devoted blood-givers - actually, he gives plasma about every 3 weeks. How do you know there's never a shortage? In Australia, at least, they advertise quite a bit for new donors - I don't think they'd do that if they were over-supplied. They'd probably be much more interested in financial donations

Better to have blood and not need it, than to need blood and not have it. I think that is Red Cross' philosophy toward blood. Which makes sense, because conflict is unpredictable, and natural disasters only slightly more predictable.

Yes, I suppose so. If too many people stopped giving there would be a lot of sick and injured people left without much hope.